How the BBC empowered the London terrorists

We now think we know who exploded the bombs that smashed fifty people to raw hamburger meat last week in London. The accused are four young British—born dupes of Islamist indoctrination, "friends from Leeds," who were recorded by security cameras walking to a tube station, "laughing" and carrying their backpack bombs.

Their sanctified butchery happened only a few minutes' tube ride from Broadcasting House, whence the British Broadcasting Corporation sends out a daily barrage of propaganda tailored to aid and abet jihadi terrorists. We now know that the BBC almost came down from its moralistic perch after the bombing, by deigning to use the word "terrorist" to talk about terrorists. But cooler heads prevailed, and the Beeb backed off at the last moment for fear of upsetting its World Service audience.

The BBC World Service is listened to by millions of radicalized Muslims, who feed on hatred and cheer the slaughter of innocents. This is PC "sensitivity" carried to the point of madness. It can only help to inspire future bombers.

In World War II, Adolf Hitler used radio broadcasts by the British traitor 'Lord Haw Haw' to demoralize British forces and justify the Blitz. Lord Haw Haw was hung after the War.

But in the Global War on Terror it is the British taxpayer who supports a "news" service that is so politically correct that it cannot bring itself to speak the plain truth, even with the blood of innocents flying through the Underground a few miles away. Reality takes a remote backseat to the preening high ground the BBC likes to occupy. In that process, the biggest government 'organ of propaganda' in Europe — enjoying a fifteen billion dollar annual budget and no serious oversight — has taken sides against its own people and the West. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

This is not the first time suicide bombers have assaulted democratic countries. It was Joseph Conrad, the great novelist, who portrayed the first suicide bomber in London a hundred years ago in his novel, The Secret Agent. The difference is that Britons of that time possessed complete moral clarity. Western politicians and news media were of one voice in condemning mass murder for the sake of political theater.

Not today. The media simply rationalize and defend those who would happily slash their throats like sheep. This is called "objectivity," but it is simply treason against the values held by every decent person in the West. Since terrorists triumph by demoralizing democracies, it is the BBC that is now stabbing Britain in the back.

In fact, values treason is quite the thing among the British chattering classes. In the fantasy world of the Left, the nation—state is doomed to extinction anyway. Karl Marx said so. Any evidence for such a belief is lacking, but facts have never been at issue. To hate the nation—state — the life raft on which we all sink or swim — is to parade one's higher morality.

As a result, to this day no well—known enlightened British intellectual has been able to forthrightly condemn the Soviet spies who utterly penetrated British intelligence in the Cold War. They were Cambridge graduates, after all, and class will tell, even in betraying one's country. Moreover, they were predominantly homosexual and therefore entitled to special consideration and respect. The fact that the Cambridge Spies abetted Stalin's tyranny, aiding in the killing tens of millions of innocent human beings, was, if anything, a point of pride. 'You keep on talking about 5 million victims' complained A.J. Ayer to his friend Kingsley Amis when they debated the matter, as if those five million people were insentient trash. Ayer was the Regius Professor of Logic at Cambridge, who simply couldnąt see the point of even worrying about those five million souls. They were just eggs to be smashed for Lenin's grand omelet.

With an elite like this, the much admired British will to resist fascism is no longer assured. When Britain still had a spinal column it was firmly based on a solid understanding of the critical role of morale, confidence and pride in one's country. The Victorians governed the entire Indian subcontinent with a ridiculously tiny army — because it had immense faith in itself and its civilizing mission. The people of India, used to arbitrary tyranny, largely agreed. After the Mughals and the Maharajahs, the progress brought by British rule was a vast improvement, one that is still honored in the memory of India and Pakistan. No longer. Like the rest of West Europe, Britain has been subverted by its own elites.

Curiously enough, last week it was the Arab and Iranian media that immediately understood this. The Editor—in—Chief of the London daily Al—Sharq Al—Awsat, said that the incitement to Jihad in London had been visible but was never stopped:

'In London, we have seen, and are seeing, the money being collected in the streets, and the conventions under various titles, and everyone is inciting to Jihad in our Arab countries and cursing the land of unbelief in which they live. When you express amazement [at this], they tell you that this is freedom. Has freedom no responsibility? No one answers.'

Certainly not the BBC.

James Lewis is a frequent contributor.

We now think we know who exploded the bombs that smashed fifty people to raw hamburger meat last week in London. The accused are four young British—born dupes of Islamist indoctrination, "friends from Leeds," who were recorded by security cameras walking to a tube station, "laughing" and carrying their backpack bombs.

Their sanctified butchery happened only a few minutes' tube ride from Broadcasting House, whence the British Broadcasting Corporation sends out a daily barrage of propaganda tailored to aid and abet jihadi terrorists. We now know that the BBC almost came down from its moralistic perch after the bombing, by deigning to use the word "terrorist" to talk about terrorists. But cooler heads prevailed, and the Beeb backed off at the last moment for fear of upsetting its World Service audience.

The BBC World Service is listened to by millions of radicalized Muslims, who feed on hatred and cheer the slaughter of innocents. This is PC "sensitivity" carried to the point of madness. It can only help to inspire future bombers.

In World War II, Adolf Hitler used radio broadcasts by the British traitor 'Lord Haw Haw' to demoralize British forces and justify the Blitz. Lord Haw Haw was hung after the War.

But in the Global War on Terror it is the British taxpayer who supports a "news" service that is so politically correct that it cannot bring itself to speak the plain truth, even with the blood of innocents flying through the Underground a few miles away. Reality takes a remote backseat to the preening high ground the BBC likes to occupy. In that process, the biggest government 'organ of propaganda' in Europe — enjoying a fifteen billion dollar annual budget and no serious oversight — has taken sides against its own people and the West. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

This is not the first time suicide bombers have assaulted democratic countries. It was Joseph Conrad, the great novelist, who portrayed the first suicide bomber in London a hundred years ago in his novel, The Secret Agent. The difference is that Britons of that time possessed complete moral clarity. Western politicians and news media were of one voice in condemning mass murder for the sake of political theater.

Not today. The media simply rationalize and defend those who would happily slash their throats like sheep. This is called "objectivity," but it is simply treason against the values held by every decent person in the West. Since terrorists triumph by demoralizing democracies, it is the BBC that is now stabbing Britain in the back.

In fact, values treason is quite the thing among the British chattering classes. In the fantasy world of the Left, the nation—state is doomed to extinction anyway. Karl Marx said so. Any evidence for such a belief is lacking, but facts have never been at issue. To hate the nation—state — the life raft on which we all sink or swim — is to parade one's higher morality.

As a result, to this day no well—known enlightened British intellectual has been able to forthrightly condemn the Soviet spies who utterly penetrated British intelligence in the Cold War. They were Cambridge graduates, after all, and class will tell, even in betraying one's country. Moreover, they were predominantly homosexual and therefore entitled to special consideration and respect. The fact that the Cambridge Spies abetted Stalin's tyranny, aiding in the killing tens of millions of innocent human beings, was, if anything, a point of pride. 'You keep on talking about 5 million victims' complained A.J. Ayer to his friend Kingsley Amis when they debated the matter, as if those five million people were insentient trash. Ayer was the Regius Professor of Logic at Cambridge, who simply couldnąt see the point of even worrying about those five million souls. They were just eggs to be smashed for Lenin's grand omelet.

With an elite like this, the much admired British will to resist fascism is no longer assured. When Britain still had a spinal column it was firmly based on a solid understanding of the critical role of morale, confidence and pride in one's country. The Victorians governed the entire Indian subcontinent with a ridiculously tiny army — because it had immense faith in itself and its civilizing mission. The people of India, used to arbitrary tyranny, largely agreed. After the Mughals and the Maharajahs, the progress brought by British rule was a vast improvement, one that is still honored in the memory of India and Pakistan. No longer. Like the rest of West Europe, Britain has been subverted by its own elites.

Curiously enough, last week it was the Arab and Iranian media that immediately understood this. The Editor—in—Chief of the London daily Al—Sharq Al—Awsat, said that the incitement to Jihad in London had been visible but was never stopped:

'In London, we have seen, and are seeing, the money being collected in the streets, and the conventions under various titles, and everyone is inciting to Jihad in our Arab countries and cursing the land of unbelief in which they live. When you express amazement [at this], they tell you that this is freedom. Has freedom no responsibility? No one answers.'